RAM SWARATH PANDEY Vs. BIMAL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 170 of 2004, which is pending before the court of learned Sub JudgeIX, Ranchi. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the plaintiffs have to examine one more witness and, thereafter, let the trial court be directed to complete the trial within stipulated time. Even previously also, a writ petition bearing W.P. (C) No. 5534 of 2009 was preferred by the petitioners and the direction was given to dispose of the suit within six months vide order dated 15th March, 2010. Such time limit is already over and till today the trial is going on. The respondents (original defendants) are taking time and they are interested in prolonging the dispute between the parties as they are in possession of the properties.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that they are not interested in lengthening the title suit, pending before the trial court. In fact, they are cooperating in the hearing of the aforesaid title suit and they are not asking any unnecessary adjournments. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that the plaintiffs have not examined their all the witnesses and, therefore, no sooner did, the examination of plaintiffs' witness are over, the defendants' side will complete their evidences.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners shall present order sheet of Title Suit No. 170 of 2004 on every months before this Court.